As someone who's not running either, but was sampling both about a month back, my experience was (1) the current and next-to-latest openvz patches produced kernels which couldn't really run openvz - it crashed - and it took a couple of weeks to get a response to my bug report on that, while (2) lxc has a very responsive development team, when I hit bugs there too, but it's maybe 6 months out of being mature enough to really pay off for a sysadmin of mid-level skills like me. If you're an ace, I'm sure you can get good use now. For what little my short-acquaintance comparison's worth, the openvz bugs I hit were a lot more serious. It's doubtless presently more feature-complete, when it works. But there's a lot more momentum in lxc, plus it's mainline in the kernel so it's future's brighter. Meanwhile I've settled on kvm, but can see some real uses for lxc in the not-far future. Whit _______________________________________________ Containers mailing list Containers@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx https://lists.linux-foundation.org/mailman/listinfo/containers
